This site displays a prototype of a “Web 2.0” version of the daily
Federal Register. It is not an official legal edition of the Federal
Register, and does not replace the official print version or the official
electronic version on GPO’s govinfo.gov.
The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal
Register documents. Each document posted on the site includes a link to the
corresponding official PDF file on govinfo.gov. This prototype edition of the
daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov will remain an unofficial
informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal
Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status.
For complete information about, and access to, our official publications
and services, go to
About the Federal Register
on NARA's archives.gov.
The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable
regulatory information on FederalRegister.gov with the objective of
establishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned
publication in the future. While every effort has been made to ensure that
the material on FederalRegister.gov is accurately displayed, consistent with
the official SGML-based PDF version on govinfo.gov, those relying on it for
legal research should verify their results against an official edition of
the Federal Register. Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML
rendition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov does not
provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts.
Rule
Enter a search term or FR citation e.g.
88 FR 38230 FR 78782024-13208USDA09/05/24RULE0503-AA39SORN
Choosing an item from
full text search results
will bring you to those results. Pressing enter in the search box
will also bring you to search results.
Choosing an item from
suggestions
will bring you directly to the content.
Adoption of Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards; States and Tribal Mitigation Planning Regulations Change
This table of contents is a navigational tool, processed from the
headings within the legal text of Federal Register documents.
This repetition of headings to form internal navigation links
has no substantive legal effect.
Document page views are updated periodically throughout the day and are
cumulative counts for this document. Counts are subject to sampling,
reprocessing and revision (up or down) throughout the day.
Page views
5,629
as of
09/11/2026 at 2:15 pm EDT
Other Formats
Enhanced Content - Other Formats
This document is also available in the following formats:
This PDF is FR Doc. 2015-24584 as it appeared on Public Inspection on
10/01/2015 at 8:45 am.
If you are using public inspection listings for legal research, you
should verify the contents of the documents against a final, official
edition of the Federal Register. Only official editions of the
Federal Register provide legal notice of publication to the public and judicial notice
to the courts under 44 U.S.C. 1503 & 1507.
Learn more here.
Published Document: 2015-24584 (80 FR 59549)
This document has been published in the Federal Register. Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.
AGENCY:
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION:
Final rule.
SUMMARY:
On December 19, 2014, all Federal award-making agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its component, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), published a joint interim final rule implementing the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)'s Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. DHS and FEMA now adopt, with one change, the interim final rule as final. The change restores language in the FEMA State and Tribal mitigation planning regulations that was inadvertently removed by the interim final rule.
DATES:
Effective Date:
November 2, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andrea Brandon, Director, Financial Assistance Policy and Oversight (FAPO), Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCIO), DHS, at (202) 447-0675 or
Andrea.Brandon@hq.dhs.gov. Paul Huang, Acting Division Director, Risk Analysis Division, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, DHS/FEMA, at (202) 646-3252 or
Paul.Huang@fema.dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On November 23, 2009, the President issued Executive Order 13520 (“Reducing Improper Payments and Eliminating Waste in Federal Programs”). On February 28, 2011, the President issued a Presidential Memorandum (“Administrative Flexibility, Lower Costs, and Better Results for State, Local, and Tribal Governments”). These documents directed OMB to work with Executive Branch agencies to potentially establish reforms on Federal grant policies.
In response, on October 27, 2011, OMB established the Council on Financial Assistance Reform, an interagency group of Executive Branch officials tasked with creating an accountable structure to coordinate financial assistance, streamline Federal grant-making requirements, ease administrative burdens, and strengthen Federal fund oversight to reduce risks of waste, fraud, and abuse.
On February 28, 2012, OMB published an Advanced Notice of Proposed Guidance.
See77 FR 11778. On February 1, 2013, OMB published a Notice of Proposed Guidance.
See78 FR 7282. Both documents solicited public comment on ideas for reforming the requirements that govern the management of Federal financial assistance awards. On December 26, 2013, OMB published the Uniform Guidance, which added Part 200 (“OMB Guidance”) to Title 2 (“Grants and Agreements”) of the Code of Federal Regulations.
See79 FR 75871. The Uniform Guidance included:
The consolidation of eight previously-issued OMB Circulars on grants and awards;
A uniform set of administrative requirements for grant recipients;
A focus on grantee performance over compliance for accountability;
An emphasis on efficient uses of information technology and shared services;
A uniform set of cost principles that treats costs transparently and consistently;
A limitation on allowable costs in order to make best uses of Federal resources;
The standardization of business processes using consistent data element definitions;
An emphasis on oversight by reviewing risks prior to awarding grants; and
A uniform set of audit requirements that prioritizes identifying the risks of fraud, waste, and abuse.
The Uniform Guidance required Federal agencies to implement the policies and procedures applicable to Federal awards by promulgating a regulation to be effective by December 26, 2014.
See2 CFR 200.110.
On December 19, 2014, all Federal award-making agencies promulgated a joint interim final rule implementing the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards.
See79 FR 75871. In the interim final rule, DHS adopted OMB's Guidance as DHS's own via 2 CFR part 3002, and FEMA removed 44 CFR part 13 (FEMA's grant administration regulations). Also, throughout Title 44, FEMA replaced all references to Part 13 with corresponding references to 2 CFR parts 200 and 3002, as applicable.
During the joint interim final rule's comment period, OMB received 61 comments from individuals and organizations. No comments OMB received referenced DHS or FEMA. Thus, DHS and FEMA are adopting the interim final rule as final, with one change.
II. Change to December 19, 2014 Interim Final Rule
FEMA's mitigation planning regulations are located at 44 CFR part 201, and set forth instructions on the policies and procedures for State, Tribal, and local hazard mitigation planning. Hazard mitigation is any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural hazards and their effects. The purpose of hazard mitigation planning is to identify policies and actions that can be implemented over the long-term to reduce risk and future losses. State, Indian Tribal, and local governments are required to develop a hazard mitigation plan as one of the conditions for establishing eligibility for certain types of Federal non-emergency disaster assistance and FEMA mitigation grants.
The December 19, 2014 joint interim final rule contained an inadvertent error
( printed page 59550)
to FEMA's Standard State Mitigation Planning regulations at 44 CFR 201.4(c)(7) and to FEMA's Tribal Mitigation Planning regulations at 44 CFR 201.7(c)(6). Prior to the December 19, 2014 joint interim final rule, these sections read as published in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, revised as of October 1, 2014.
In the December 19, 2014 joint interim final rule, FEMA revised the first sentences of 44 CFR 201.4(c)(7) and 44 CFR 201.7(c)(6) with a general citation to 2 CFR parts 200 and 3002. However, FEMA unintentionally removed the second sentence of these sections and thus inadvertently removed a procedure by which States and Indian Tribal governments amend their mitigation plans when necessary to reflect changes in State, Indian Tribal, or Federal laws or regulations. In this final rule, FEMA is reinserting this provision.
While FEMA previously referenced 44 CFR 13.11(d) in both 44 CFR 201.4(c)(7) and in 44 CFR 201.7(c)(6), FEMA, as noted above, removed 44 CFR part 13 and replaced all references to Part 13 with corresponding references to 2 CFR parts 200 and 3002, as applicable. There are no corresponding pinpoint cites in 2 CFR part 200 or Part 3002 that replace the requirements found at 44 CFR 13.11(d). Thus, FEMA cannot carry this reference over to the revised regulations. FEMA regulations have included the procedure for States and Indian Tribal governments since 2002 and 2007, respectively, to amend their plans to reflect changes in State, Indian Tribal, or Federal laws, statutes and regulations, as applicable. As FEMA is simply reinserting an inadvertently removed and longstanding provision, this change does not create new program requirements. FEMA also describes these provisions in various guidance materials and is revising the references as applicable.[1]
Pursuant to Executive Order 12866, as amended, OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) has designated this final rule to be not significant.
B. Administrative Procedure Act
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) provides that an agency may dispense with notice and comment rulemaking procedures when it promulgates an interpretive rule, a general statement of policy, or a rule of agency organization, procedure, or practice.
See5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). DHS is issuing this change to reinstate FEMA procedures inadvertently removed in the interim final rule, related to ensuring mitigation plan compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Thus, DHS finds that this part of the final rule relates to agency procedures and is exempt from notice and comment.
In addition, the APA provides that an agency may dispense with notice and comment rulemaking procedures when an agency, for good cause, finds those procedures are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.
See5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). DHS is reinserting two provisions concerning mitigation plan compliance with applicable laws and regulations, a requirement that was already present in 44 CFR 201.4(c)(7) and 44 CFR 201.7(c)(6). Thus, DHS finds that notice and comment is unnecessary and that this part of the final rule is exempt from notice and comment.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires an agency that is issuing a final rule to provide a final regulatory flexibility analysis or to certify that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final rule imposes no cost as the common interim rule implemented OMB final guidance issued on December 26, 2013, and did not have a significant economic impact beyond the impact of the December 2013 guidance.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48 (Mar. 22, 1995) (2 U.S.C. 1501et seq.), requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or Tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. As the final rule would not have an impact greater than $100,000,000 or more in any one year, it is not an unfunded Federal mandate.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Ch. 3506; 5 CFR Appendix A.1) (PRA), DHS and FEMA reviewed this final rule and have determined that there are no new collections of information contained therein.
F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, “Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments,” (65 FR 67249, Nov. 9, 2000), applies to agency regulations that have Tribal implications, that is, regulations that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Under this Executive Order, to the extent practicable and permitted by law, no agency shall promulgate any regulation that has Tribal implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on Indian Tribal governments, and that is not required by statute, unless funds necessary to pay the direct costs incurred by the Indian Tribal government or the Tribe in complying with the regulation are provided by the Federal Government, or the agency consults with Tribal officials. DHS and FEMA have determined that this final rule does not have any Tribal implications.